The Impact of Deregulation

What About Me?

Generally I don't think the deregulation of optical dispensing will have as large an impact as some may think. The removal of the licence is already, to some extent, putting a focus on the qualifications and education and training of the optical dispenser rather than possession of a licence.

The TAFE Certificate IV in Optical Dispensing will be the benchmark around Australia. It is now a nationally endorsed course steered by us in NSW and under the National Health Training Package. Already through approaches by individuals who may have a licence but not formally recognised qualifications, we are seeing people applying to either upgrade, apply for recognition of previous experience and/or qualifications, or formally apply for the course.

For instance, this seems to be particularly true already for overseas applicants who have already been given an optical dispenser licence, but now need the qualification for permanent residency.

I think what will be interesting to watch is perhaps the difference between the independent optometric provisions of highly professional eye care which will more than ever need to project its professional image to the public. There are optometrists that understand only too well the importance of having highly qualified staff!

In my opinion, the best standard of eye care service and product delivery always occurs where optical dispensers, optometrists and ophthalmologists, optical technicians, along with all ancillary staff, work very closely together to achieve the best for the clients/patients that we serve.

The Point of Difference

I think that people are also forgetting that optical dispensers will not operate in a vacuum but now operate as one of the ‘Unregistered Health Practitioners' as defined under the Health Care Complaints Act 1993. This requires a strict Code of Conduct and enables complaints to be heard directly to the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC).

In addition, the Consumer Laws in Australia offer a high degree of protection for consumers of healthcare delivery of both products and services; while the clauses apparently being amended in the Act to require that an unregistered health practitioner cannot supply novelty contact lenses unless they hold tertiary qualifications in optical dispensing and supply specified health and safety information with the novelty contact lenses, is a sensible public safety mechanism.

Hence, the ‘point of difference'. Optometrists who wish to show their professional independence from say, the large chains largely employing optometrists, are already becoming well aware of the need to have the most highly trained and qualified staff.

This happens primarily through a course qualification (e.g. the Cert. IV in Optical Dispensing from TAFE) in conjunction with the gradual and continuing on-the-job (in the Practice) experience gained to complement this formal qualification. They are also realising the importance of ‘branding' themselves with this difference to the public.

I think this focus on people getting properly qualified and trained, rather than just meeting the requirements of a licensing system; will potentially put a much better balance on the need for proper training and qualifications within both the employment market and the eye care market with the public.

The overseas experience also suggests this. What will also be interesting to watch over time, is how the large ‘chains' go about their marketing to the general public; particularly on the issue of standards and quality associated with people obtaining professionally dispensed eyewear and who they are getting this from.

Who Will Take the Role?

The question as to whether the Australasian Dispensing Opticians Association (ADOA) is able to be truly functional as a self-regulating body remains to be seen. In the absence of licensing, you may think that the vacuum created would naturally lead towards ADOA taking this role. However, for the main, the majority of optical dispensers are not members of ADOA.

If ADOA take up the opportunity created by this change to be the representing body, the transition to become the self-regulating body will be a relatively smooth and natural one. But this would depend on whether there is truly a move by most dispensers to join it, combined with the way in which ADOA might market its membership in terms of relative qualifications and standards, or codes of practice, along with benefits of membership.

However, optical dispensing can never truly be independent from prescribing in a commercial sense, as one is naturally dependent on the other. So will the selfregulation be able to be carried out by an independent dispensing body? Or, should it be a co-operative regulatory body? Or, is the proximity of dispensing therapeutic goods with too much proximity to the prescriber, or heaven forbid, by the prescriber, not in the public interest?

As For Everyone Else...

The other professional bodies, such as Optometrists Association Australia (OAA), are also in an opportunistic position to assist in this self-regulatory role rather than just try to control it. I know some of my optometrist colleagues who are already forcing the issue in terms of ‘all care - no responsibility'.

For example, if their patients/clients choose to take the prescription to be dispensed by someone who is ‘not qualified'. Hence, how the general public recognise a qualified dispenser will also be an interesting thing over time.

Perhaps a better question is: Does the general public recognise an optical dispenser when they see one anyway? Will the self-regulating body, be able to assist the public and the employers of those dispensers, where the majority are not self employed, by being able to differentiate between an unqualified and a qualified one? Will the selfregulating body be an independent optical dispensing organisation or will it be a self-regulating ‘inclusive industry body', that is inclusive of all practitioners who deliver quality eye care?

The final question should be, I think, what is in the interest of the public?

My humble opinion for what it is worth.

Peter Druery, is a qualified (and currently licensed) optical dispenser and optical technician. He teaches both of these disciplines within the Allied Health & Life Sciences Section (Ophthalmic Optics) at Sydney Institute of TAFE Ultimo, Sydney. He has had 34 continuous years experience in the industry. He also holds a B.Ed (Hons) UTS and a Dip.Teach (SCAE). Peter teaches full time and is currently the optical section coordinator.